Mumbai Court June 1955 Judgments
Jayashree Shantaram Vankudre Vs. Rajkamal Kalamandir Private Ltd
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-28-1955
Reported in: AIR1960Bom136; [1960]30CompCas141(Bom)
K.K. Desai, J.1. On December 31, I947, the petitioner and one Shantaram then being wife and husband floated respondent No. I company as a private limited company. The petitioner was registered as a shareholder in respect of 25I ordinary shares (of respondent no. I company) being the subject- matter of this petition. The petitioner and the said Shantaram both continued to act as and were directors of respondent No. I company on July I, I955. 2. From the deed of transfer dated June 28, I955, a copy whereof is annexed as exhibit 2 to the affidavit in reply made on behalf of respondednt No. I company, it appears that the petitioner had signed the deed of transfer in respect of these 25I ordinary shares of the company. In the register of shares of respondent No. I company as on July I, I955, these shares were transferred and registered in the name of respondent No.2 From the minutes of the meeting of the directors held on July I, I955, it appears that the petitioner and the said Shantaram w...
Tag this Judgment!Krishnan (K.P.) and ors. Vs. State of Bombay and anr.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-23-1955
Reported in: (1955)IILLJ208Bom
Tendolkar, J.1. This is a petition by the employees of Firestone Tyre and Rubber Company of India, Ltd. for the issue of a writ of mandamus calling upon the State of Bombay, who are the first respondent, to refer a certain dispute to adjudication. The second respondents are the company.2. The matter arises in this way. The petitioners are some of the employees of the company and are members of the employees' union, a trade union registered under the Indian Trade Union Act. On 17 November 1953 the union sent a letter to the company putting forward certain demands relating to gratuity, paid holidays, classification of certain employees and bonus for the year November 1952 to October 1953. A copy of the said letter was also sent to the Commissioner of Labour with a request that he should intervene in the matter. The company did not send any reply to the said letter and thereupon the union wrote to the Assistant Commissioner of Labour to commence conciliation proceedings in the matter of t...
Tag this Judgment!Shankarrao Madhavrao Vs. K.C. Sen and ors.
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-21-1955
Reported in: AIR1956Bom79; (1955)57BOMLR1023
Bavdekar, J.1. Tills is an application for a writ of certiorari or an order or a direction quashing the order of the Bombay Revenue Tribunal which refused to entertain an application for revision of an order passed by the Collector on appeal from the determination of reasonable rent by the Mamlatdar.2. The question which falls for determination is the interpretation of section 12, Subsection (5) of the Bombay Tenancy and Agricultural Lands. Act, 67 of 1948. That Sub-section provides:'Every order passed by the Mamlatdar under this section if not appealed against, and every order passed by the Collector in appeal shall hold good for a period of five years and shall not be called in question during that period: Provided that the Mamlatdar or the Collector, as the case may be, may, during the said period of five years-- (i) reduce the rent if on an application made to him by a tenant the Mamlatdar or the Collector, as the case may be, is satisfied that(a) on account of deterioration of the...
Tag this Judgment!Mulji Gangaram and anr. (of Vivekananda Mills) Vs. F. Jeejeebhoy and o ...
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-21-1955
Reported in: (1955)IILLJ760Bom
1. The petitioners preferred an application under Section 79 of the Bombay Industrial Relations Act XI of 1947 for being reinstated in the service of opponent 3. The application was dismissed on 5 May;1953. Against the said order of dismissal the petitioners preferred an appeal to the industrial court. The appeal was despatched by registered post on 4 June 1954 from Ahmedabad and was received in the office of the industrial court on 5 June 1954. Thereafter the appeal was posted for the hearing, and the industrial court took the view that the appeal not having been preferred within thirty days from the date on which the order appealed from was passed, it was barred by the law of limitation. Accordingly the appeal was dismissed. An appeal against that order to the Labour Appellate Tribunal was also dismissed. The petitioners have now come to this Court with a request to issue writs under Articles 226 and 227 of the Constitution of India for an order vacating the order of the industrial c...
Tag this Judgment!Ramhitram Ramadhar Dube Vs. State of Madhya Pradesh
Court: Mumbai
Decided on: Jun-03-1955
Reported in: 1956CriLJ756
1. The appellant Ramhitram son of Ramadhar Dube, an ex-police constable attached to Raipur district, was prosecuted on three counts for the murders of Head Constable Sheikh Abdulla, Constable Chinsingh, and one Mst. Keja. He was convicted on all the three charges and sentenced to death. With this appeal there is also for consideration a reference under Section 374, Criminal p. C. for the confirmation of the sentence of death passed on the accused for each of the three offences.2. The appellant was attached to the police guard at Gariaband Sub-Treasury. He was on sentry duty from 12 midnight to 2 a in. on the morning of 16-8-1953 At that time the guard consisted of Head Constable Sheikh Abdulla, who was permanently in charge of the guard, and four constables, Ramprasad, Ramsingh, Chain. singh (deceased), and Ramhitram, were appointed for the duty. Previous to this, one Shatrughnasingh was a member of the guard, but he was replaced by Ramhitram, the appellant, because he was sent to Raji...
Tag this Judgment!- ‹ Prev
- Next ›